MOL

We received the competition shortlist via internet today!

Regarding how the competition has been organised until now, we were in fact quite surprised to see any information at all.

However, on closer examination a curious fact comes to light! From the 60 or so architects who submitted their work to the Archeire site, only 8 have been chosen for the exhibition to take place in Dublin this month and just for information almost all come from the anglo-world.

Funny little fact wouldn’t you agree!!

Another point which I would like to mention again in connection to the Shortlist is the amazing reoccurrance of certain offices again and again. I think I saw one office with 4 entries !

If competitions are to be run fairly then to allow an office, usually one with substancial monetary clout who can afford to pay the entrance fee a number of times ( win or lose )
is really contrary to fair play !

A a middle-large office we take part regularly in international competitions and until now have never experienced that an office send more than one entry. It is simply not allowed.

At the Dublin Tower Competition because absolutely nothing except it seems the acceptance of the entry fee, was professionally organised, an office could have theoretically entered a thousand times! What an absurd fact ! Imagine even further that an office manages to win all the prizes available !
A suffocatingly embarrassing situation !

Actually it is quite beyond my comprehension to imagine how an architect can submit more than one design for any competition. Surely he tries to submit the concept/idea that he believes to be the most suited to that particular brief. Is then his second or third entry his second or third best idea? If so then why does he bother to hand in the second or third at all. I mean if an architect has a style or design philosophy then surely if the jury does not like his first entry then how can he hope that they will suddenly elevate his fifth choice entry to the winning position ?

Obviously some architects did, without a thought or notion as to what such a behaviour communicates, both professionally and to a wider audience.

Having waited, as everyone else has, for an unexceptably long time, one gets the feeling that it was unfortunately not really worth waiting for at all.

After seeing the first images of this competition winner, which I admit are of a relatively small scale and therefore difficult to read, I cannot help but thinking that Dublin has squandered an opportunity in providing the city with a world class building.

I find that nothing about this building image displays any contextual or indeed Landmark merits. Such a quality of building one usually expects to find in some investors development portfolio and indeed this tower appears as if it could be built anywhere and unfortunately is in many cities and towns throughout the world.
The fact that each storey seems to have been treated similarly, raises the question as to where is the music studio? I find it relatively hard to believe that it is contained in this ‘hat-like’ structure on the roof of the building which seems to have taken its inspiration from the ‘Messeturm’ in Frankfurt am Main, Germany,
also a featureless example of 80’s American Highrise Architecture. This building has in the mean time been christened by the people of Frankfurt as the ‘Pencil’. A wonderful and inspiring name for a Highrise Tower as I am sure everyone will agree !

And it is about inspiration and a sense of belonging to a place that must be , I feel, some of the most important design criteria for a Landmark Tower in a European capital city.
This competition winning entry does not seem to fill this Landmark role and seems also not to react in any significant way to industrial surrounds or to, and probably most importantly, the river which guides ships into the city and for this one needs a gate or marker or beacon.

I am very dissapointed that such an entry was chosen as the best and i am fully convinced that after such an object is build that it will receive little if any international recognision.

I would be very interested to know who indeed was on the jury and what particular qualifications they possesed to judge such an important building for Dublin. Which architects were involved or were there any at all ? Any internationally renowned or even foreign architects or designers in the panel ? These factors which I cannot seem to find are the fundamentals of a well organised and high quality competition, essential to a good result.
A result that in this case seems to leave alot to be desired.

I suggest that this new building should be named the ‘ Dublin Tower ‘ because the only element that makes it any way ‘ Landmark’ is its height, which simply structurally is, and its prominent location which was existing. A ‘Landmark’ Tower it is not.

If we are not badly mistaken, there was a site from these architects by the name of Doonan from somewhere in the US.

Is this the architect who was obviously offended by some comments on his Tower entry and who formally requested that his work should not be published anymore or is there another reason for this sudden disapperance of his Tower ?

Irrelevant of the reason however I still believe,
and indeed this belief is legally supported, that any architects who publish their competition entries prior to a jury decision, clearly must be disqualified